Comments

It wouldn't matter how many Police were appointed and paid for, most of the problems associated with the Police are limitations in what they are tasked to prioritise by their seniors and by government policies.......which in turn, are dictated by Brussels eurocrats........our Police have their hands tied by european policies and an over zealous application of the Human Rights act.
Having a person, accountable to the public, at the top of the organisation, raises the likelihood of US being able to influence Policing priorities. This was entirely impossible with the old system and it showed profoundly.
Simple sums show the burden of this office, assuming the £1.8M cost estimated elsewhere amounts to around £2.60 per person per year.............how many people would truly notice the loss of this sum............more than this is often found down the back of the sofa or sitting in the coin tray in the car.
Whilst it still has to be proven that this new system works, I feel it's a small enough sum to gamble on such an important, life changing public service.

I see that Bob491 is spouting his usual "lame duck" nonsense. Sir Clive is the best man for the job from the Leics & Rutland candidates (despite him being my second choice).
He was elected according to the rules of the election. Tne fact that 85% of the electorate chose not to vote was not his fault. It was an ill thought out idea that was badly executed, but the successful candidate does need staff to delegate to, just as the old Police Authority had.
We could have had a comedian like Paddy Tipping in Notts, who stated that he wanted to be Robin Hood to the Chief Constable's Sheriff of Nottingham. What a buffoon.

£450 000 x 4 = £1 800 000.
At about £25k per new police officer, that equals 72 (SEVENTY TWO) potential new recruits over 4 years. There are 43 police forces across England and Wales.
In a time when the police are being asked to make severe cut backs, the appointment of PCCs is farcical.

This lame duck Con PCC who is supported by just one out of every thirteen people on the electorate is being dreadfully dishonest by claiming he doesn't want a deputy.
For it transpires he has not one assistant but an amazing TEN extra assistants costing a total of £450,000 a year, on top of his own gold plated pension paid for 100% by taxpayers. Absolutely Dreadful!!
He has a chief executive, chief finance officer, a head of governance, two governance support officers, an office administrator, a policy and performance officer plus a communications officer, a finance officer and a planning performance officer.
Doesn't it just prove he has absolutely no idea of how to do the job himself, as I stated even before the election. We need to get rid of him asap before all police constables are made redundant to pay for him.
I wonder how many of the paltry few who did vote for him would be horrified at this enormous hidden bill the taxpayers have been suddenly saddled with.

by Rajjan
Monday, December 10 2012, 5:45PM
."Sir Clive Loader you have proved that you are the right person for the position, If you have to keep Sarah Russell in your team she should be in bottom of the ladder. If she wanted to be a deputy then she is not the looser only one step down and earning only £2000 less then you. Keep her away."
.
That does not make sense, either in English or in content.

The staff referred to here are by and large are the old police authority people - director of finance, chief executive, head of human resources. They are the people who effectively run the force. They've been there for years.
(Ciaran, the crime reporter)

Sir Clive Loader you have proved that you are the right person for the position, If you have to keep Sarah Russell in your team she should be in bottom of the ladder. If she wanted to be a deputy then she is not the looser only one step down and earning only £2000 less then you. Keep her away.